English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The rs2057482 polymorphism in the  hypoxia inducible factor 1 subunit alpha (HIF1A)  gene has been reported to be associated with a risk of several types of cancer, but this association has not yet been definitively confirmed. We performed this meta-analysis to determine whether rs2057482 is associated with overall cancer risk.    Methods  The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched for the potential studies about the association between the rs2057482 and cancer risk. The data of genotype frequencies in cases with cancer and controls were extracted from the selected studies. Odds ratios (ORs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to determine the strength of the associations.    Results  The meta-analysis showed an association between the rs2057482 polymorphism and overall cancer risk. However, a stratified analysis of ethnicity did not show any significant association between rs2057482 and cancer risk in the Asian population.    Conclusions  The rs2057482 polymorphism was associated with decreased overall cancer risk, based on the currently available studies. However, this conclusion needs verification by further well-designed epidemiology studies that examine different cancer types and more subjects.

The association between hypoxia inducible factor 1 subunit alpha gene rs2057482 polymorphism and cancer risk: a meta-analysis